Some of the index is a leading indicator and some of it is a trailing indicator, and as a result it is a very ambiguous index. The consumer's true sentiment is based upon actual prior circumstances, current conditions, and it is also based upon perceived upcoming circumstances. So, YES, the media itself creates and perpetuates the problem... which makes the media itself a big part of the problem.
Consumer sentiment is not the same as consumer spending, of course, and it is a very misleading index, IMO.
To be fair, I've heard more POSITIVE talking heads lately than in a long time. The media is very polarized. Some reports suggest doom & gloom, while others talk about fantastic earnings and terrific opportunities. Reality is probably somewhere in the middle. That's partially why the market goes waaay down and then waaay up. The computer trading is another reason.
Comparing Israel to Pakistan is ridiculous, IMO. Israel is a loyal friend of the United States. I would hardly say that of Pakistan.
I can't imagine being a tiny democratic country like Israel, surrounded by some of the worst examples of terrorists states, greedy oil-rich Arab OPEC empires, Arab dictators bent on the destruction of Israel and the United States, and others.
Israel is not without fault, and neither are we, to be honest... But there is NO compariing Israel or the United States to terrorists.
Loyal friend, for real? Remember the USS Liberty and the numerous spying issues? How many times has it been threatened with international sanction, just to be vetoed by its lapdog, us? It is not a real country, it is a British mandate bankrolled by western nations. It is not economically self-sufficient. No capitalist should defend it strongly, as it relies on the goodwill of others for funds. Of course they are a "friend", they like our gifts.
We need to cut the cord. It can live on all it wants, but we can't afford it.
And Pakistan is even worse, just a pile of hell doing the world no good, yet we give it truckloads while our conditions decay every day. The comparison isn't without merit - both are wastes of scarce public funds.
It's largely political, and it's also the fact that the media is a business. It's about ratings, and it's also about shaping public opinion.
It's obvious that more and more, we are seeing the media turn against Obama. The media gave Obama a lot of support for quite a while, especially CNN, and liberal newspapers like the New York Times. But Obama is such a failure, that the sentiment of the whole world is much less positive to him, and in fact, it's quite negative compared to how it was.
The stock market isn't the primary focus of the consumer... although there is definitely a link.
The market is reactive and so is the consumer. It's a cycle. The media feeds the cycle, but eventually the cycle changes.
I don't agree that the index is worthless. I do believe, however, that it is flawed. It is misleading.
Charlie, my college degree is in advertising and public relations. I took all kinds of courses in public opinion, public (mass) persuasion, rhetoric, semantics, effective advertising and marketing, television advertising, print advertising, media and opinion manipulation, interpersonal and mass communications, behavior systems engineering, and tons more. I really enjoyed it.
I can tell you without any doubt that the index is a very misleading index, and is also used in a very misleading way. However, it is not worthless. Just like the Iowa straw poll. Is it worthless? Should it really represent as much as it seems to?... but due to the massive media attention and credibility bestowed upon it, it is waaay more infuential than it probably deserves to be.
The media is so powerful Charlie. Sooooo powerful. If you can control the media, you can practically control everything.
Oprah is an example. One of the best examples of self-promoting use of media in our history. There are many. Some political, some social, some commercial.... you get the picture.
I don't like to waste our money either, and we agree on that... but I still can NOT compare them on a political, social, or moral basis. There is no comparison whatsoever. Israel is much more like the United States than Pakistan could ever be in a trillion years. I don't want to post certain things here in this forum that would be misunderstood, so I won't.
I hate those terrorists and oil mongers and that's as far as I'll take it.
Newt is probably the best qualified of any candidate that has run for President in the last 20-30 years or more. He just does not know how to communicate to the masses. He has some baggage the Left would blow completely out of proportion. His contract with America made Clinton look like a good president. I don't think he can pull the money that is needed to win in this day and age. I imagine well over a $billion will be wasted on the Presidential election. I find that totally insane. I wish I was excited about someone. Just anyone but Obama will do for me. I kind of like Cain.
>I don't think it was worth losing 20 of our Navy Seals to get OBL.
Biden couldn't wait to expose the info so the perpetrators of the alleged capture could become targets. If he hadn't Obama would have.
>Now the Chinese have first hand knowledge of our Stealth helicopters,
Which is worse?: Clinton giving them multi-warhead missile technology information or Obama giving them stealth technology they probably didn't know existed for the helicopters.
>But Obama is such a failure, that the sentiment of the whole world is much less positive to him, and in fact, it's quite negative compared to how it was.
But I watched Meet the Press, which I rarely do, and what's-his-name was so rude to Bachmann. He would ask a question and as she started to answer he would override her talking with a contradiction or another question. It was like watching a TV interpretation on a crime show of an interview of a known criminal by a wildman policeman.
He was especially rude about her religion and a quote from Christians that the woman should be submissive to her husband. Gregory tried to interpret submissive as something that shouldn't be done--but I don't recall his ever questioning OBama and Friends about the various religions in the world that have women wearing burkas (spelling?) with only their eyes visible. Is that independence for women? How is it the religions of 57 states of Obama aren't open to question -- is it because Bachmann (and Palin) are women and possible winners for the title of "First Woman President" and they can't stand that a Republican could win that title instead of Hillary?
Then we have the President now making speeches like he had nothing to do with the ramrodded bills through democrat houses for two years and acting like he's the middle of the road conciliator? He kept the party of "No" on cutting spending going for weeks with his games while the Republicans came up with three bills to actually CUT spending--what this country must do.
I see all this as very dangerous to the future of our country because I see the political patterns in the MSM and Obamaland as more push and shove rather than fix the problems and put the country first. It's going to be more hiddle donations and backing from the Wall Street friends of the Dems and the Hollywood movies and the Hollywood stars speaking out in favor of Obama.
I also see more racial divide as a tool to try to keep the African vote blindly for Obama.
The division of the country while pretending to be the conciliator is going to wreak havoc in the markets.
Well... I think the economy will not get all that much worse. It is bad enough.
The dilemma and challenge for us conservatives is that the economy will improve a little, which is a good thing of course, but Obama will be in a position to use it in his campaign.
If Obama wins, then the REAL serious damage will come... all the way through 2016!! He would have enough time to cause massive damage to the United States unlike anything we have ever seen.
Apple doesn't need to counter the move. They are on the right track... their OWN track. Apple is the one being copied and followed by the others.
I have posted in the past that I believe Apple is going to dip into their treasure chest and make a brilliant purchase. I still believe this, and when it finally happens, we will all be applauding.
I think this makes more sense than he usually makes on raising taxes. He explains how the rich are coddled in a language that I can understand.
Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.
But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
My comparison was based on being wastes of our money rather than what they actually stand for. Of course they are different societies, and although I do not support the Israeli cash grab, I'd love it and kiss it before Pakistan any day :shades:
Just saying it is a poor use of our money, especially with so many needs at home now and in the future.
This seems like a NO BRAINER, doesn't it? If a lot of the rich also agree they should pay more taxes, why isn't this implemented immediately if not sooner?
I'd say his lack of personal judgement doesn't exactly make him a flawless candidate. He's always been a hypocritical old windbag to me. Paul still is the best in my eyes.
I'd take Cain if he could resurrect Godfather's Pizza to its former glory :shades:
I have to counter Buffett that the recipients of the largess of the US congress need to tighten their belts as well.
First, The entitlement class who are of working age and are receiving payments need to have cuts. There need to be changes about what and how they can spend the public money.
Next, the social security crowd who are already receiving payments which are more than they put in are doing well. I watched an older fellow putting gas into his foreign built fairly new car at the local quick market where I stop for coffee. I would gauge him as having benefitted from the growth in the economies through the 50s and 60s and 70s. He probably had a well-paying job at NCR or GM (or one of the other auto-related suppliers here). I didn't sense that he was a government worker such as from the Wright Patterson Air Force Base, a large area employer. He probably bought and sold houses several times and profitted greatly from each as housing values rose. His social security benefits, along with Medicare, are rapidly rising taken together as he gets older. He probably feels his wealth in the bank and bonds along with his home(s) shouldn't be open to being used for his own healthcare or other care as he ages further. It should all be supplied by the government is probably his attitude.
That attitude and payout has to change.
But my approach is that the system should not further the "take from the rich and give to the poor" approach: all should have to feel cuts. Only the lowest incomes on social security and with health problems should be exempted.
I don't see a Congress or president that's going to slow the exonential increase in entitlements coming as the baby boomers retire, and it has started now
He also says S&P's traitorous politically motivated downgrade was wrong. He's sometimes more astute than others give him credit.
I know in some European areas, the top few actually supported higher taxes for themselves, and their wish was granted. I have never understood why it is such an issue here. Some have sacrificed a lot more than others in the past few years, and that is only going to continue. You get what you pay for,I suppose.
My comparison was based on being wastes of our money rather than what they actually stand for. Of course they are different societies, and although I do not support the Israeli cash grab, I'd love it and kiss it before Pakistan any day
>...if that older man was driving let's say a Buick, would you feel the same?
That would have indicated a sagacity about money and spending to actually help our economy rather than a foreign company's profit line.
>...shared today?
No. So many of the wealthy are escaping taxes by various methods. Start with the Kennedy's as examples. Bring all their money and various shelters home to the tax table.
But I do feel there are a lot of people over 65 who have benefited greatly from the past economy and have used it up and are very vocal about anything they feel is entitlement for them being cut.
The liberal media are predictably fawning over billionaire Warren Buffett's op-ed in the New York Times Monday calling for new taxes on the super-rich.
This led MSNBC's Pat Buchanan on Monday's "Morning Joe" to challenge the Oracle of Omaha asking, "Why doesn’t he set an example and send a check for $5 billion to the federal government?"
PAT BUCHANAN: No, I’m writing a note to Warren Buffett. But look, I’m a little fed up with these people who come on, you know, their big op-eds, all these admonitions. Why doesn’t he set an example and send a check for $5 billion to the federal government? He’s got about $40 billion. You know, you had a plan up there, I talked to Howie Carr at Boston where the super-rich could contribute an extra amount. It was something like one-tenth of one percent did it. You get all this noise from these big rich folks. Let them send checks and set an example instead of writing op-eds.
Of course, the liberals in the media never seem to think about this hypocrisy.
The folks at the Huffington Post were so excited about Buffett's call they featured it as a headline at their front page:
What was your entry point on AAPL this time? I know you went long
I had been day-trading AAPL, and when I bought it around $350 in extended hours trading, I flipped those shares for a gain. In hindsight I wish I had kept those shares.
I continued to day trade AAPL, but I have not flipped the latest shares, which are at $380. I will not flip them any longer, and I will buy more at ANY and EVERY dip of 2%. That is my plan moving forward.
So, I might as well fill you in on my latest investment approach... it's not complicated by any means. I am holding specific diversified stocks for a long term, and I will only day-trade SEPERATELY from them. AAPL is not my signifcant holding.
My significant holdings are three dividend-paying stocks... INTC, VOD, and LLY... (approx. 4% - 6%). In addition to them I own significant positions in two financials, BAC and C, which are showing nice gains, and I expect them to continue to do so (finally). Also, I have energy in the form of CHK and XOM. To continue my diversification, I own CAT and GM. I have a speculative play on S, because it got so horribly hammered recently, and I am speculating that they receive the next generation iPhone.
I will buy more of these holdings when they dip. In addition, I will increase the number of shares of each of them every month (approximately). If there is a huge gain in one of them, I will ring the register a little. If there is some news that warrants me to sell (or buy) a position, I will do so.
Now, in addition to those specific stocks, I own three ETFs... SPY, DIA, and QQQ... these ETFs closely mirror the indexes in the same way that GLD mirrors the price of gold (which I do NOT own). By holding these ETFs, I do not have to select individual stocks beyond the ones I have selected, and I can trade in and out of them instantly. I believe that the DOW, the S&P, and the NASDAQ indexes will be higher by year's end, so I am significantly invested in those indexes, and I can increase my holdings every time they dip, just like a regular stock.
I also day-trade those ETFs, as they move up and down during the day.
I do hope to increase my position on AAPL, but I will have to do so carefuly, because I don't own much of it, and I don't own it at a great price (or do I?). What do you think the share price of AAPL will climb to? And how soon? Do you think I should be more agressive and buy more AAPL shares now rather than wait? Help me out... you are the AAPL guru around here.
It was an op-ed piece on I believe Townhall. However the move was thwarted and I did post that article. It was in the works to require licensing all farm equipment and drivers.
MADISON, Wis.— Wisconsin farmers are happy the U.S. Department of Transportation is backing away from its plan to reclassify agricultural machinery as commercial vehicles.
Google bought Motorola; What's Apple going to do to counter this move?
Actually they bought Motorola Mobility which was 1/2 of the company. Motorola Solutions was not part of the deal. Since they split back in January through June, Mobility shares had dropped over 20% while Solutions was up over 20%. Making/marketing hardware isn't that great of a business IMHO.
Google I'm sure was looking at a way to become more competitive directly with Apple. Although they say Motorola will have to compete with the other handset makers for Android access, I kind of doubt that will be the case for very long.
What should Apple do? I think wait until RIM is looking for buyer.
The growth in Smartphones is on the consumer side and RIM thus far hasn't made much progress in. On the commercial side, they are feeling pressure from many other handset makers.
IMHO, combing Apples ease of use and flexibility with RIM's strong commercial base and security would be great.
What if it was a foreign built car with a supposed American badge?
I'd like to see how much money the crooked banking side of the Bush family was able to hide away, too.
I'd group public sector workers, including teachers and police, in with that group who doesn't want to cut entitlements, especially when retired. If one is going to be crucified, then all need to be.
That would be a huge red flag. With Android holding strong to 40% of the US Smartphone market and Apple with 26%. That would be a monopoly of Biblical proportions.
Ahem...the rich do get off easy. Many others do as well, but so do they. This needs to be admitted.
Speaking of Buchanan, although he's a bit too social conservative for me, even he'd likely be a better bet than Newt. I do like his idea for Buffet to put his money where his mouth is.
Speaking of Buchanan, although he's a bit too social conservative for me, even he'd likely be a better bet than Newt. I do like his idea for Buffet to put his money where his mouth is.
I do hope to increase my position on AAPL, but I will have to do so carefuly, because I don't own much of it, and I don't own it at a great price (or do I?). What do you think the share price of AAPL will climb to? And how soon? Do you think I should be more agressive and buy more AAPL shares now rather than wait? Help me out... you are the AAPL guru around here.
I'm not the so called AAPL guru, but I do have a strong opinion on AAPL. This stock will make news highs probably within the next couple weeks (unless the market collapses once again, but I don't think it will). By the end of the year, I see AAPL at least at the $450 level. if not over $500 after the next great earnings report, the new iPhone5, and the iPad3.
I noticed that BIDU didn't look good early in the morning. I was holding some at the time, but off-loaded it before it went further down the drain. Funny you should mention it, as I just bought some back at a better price.
I don't think it's crashing... just having a bad day. I actually think it's a great buy, long-term.
perhaps you prefer the idea that Apple should purchase Microsoft.
That would probably be the beginning of the end for both of them. I think Apple needs to move into other areas rather than dilute their own area. MSFT is too large for them to buy and bury. Maybe Oracle to get into the Database end of the business. I still do not see Apple competing in the Business or Engineering World. They got a good grip on academia by handing out hardware and selling cheap to students. They seem to me a graphic arts tool more than a serious business or engineering platform. Though they now run most any operating system and software. Probably the biggest roadblock for me is proprietary hardware. I like mixing and matching. Then little things like having to send your iPod in when the battery goes bad. I will probably never be a real Apple fan though they have some cool stuff.
Anyone besides me consider the current tablets anything more than an overpriced fad? Netbooks are all but history. Before I even got around to buying one. I could get into a 2lb laptop with a real keyboard. My current Dell laptop is 6 years old. Ready for a new one soon. Though it still has the original battery.
Anyone besides me consider the current tablets anything more than an overpriced fad? Netbooks are all but history. Before I even got around to buying one. I could get into a 2lb laptop with a real keyboard. My current Dell laptop is 6 years old. Ready for a new one soon. Though it still has the original battery.
The tablet is FAR from a fad. And, the "netbook"? Let's just say that Steve Jobs wouldn't give the category any merit, but then came out with the MacBook Air in a 10.6" dimension, and it is a smashing sales success, as is the 13.3" version. Once they give 4G capabilities to the MacBook Air products, you can see the evolution. Next step could be a touch screen on the MacBook Air, which could fold over as a hybrid tablet/netbook. The other approach is perhaps a better Bluetooth keyboard paired to the iPad. All the iPad needs now (which might be on the next generation) (and in addition to the matching Bluetooth Keyboard I mentioned) is USB or Thunderbolt output (with HDMI conversion), and a better ability to print and manage Microsoft office documents.
Overpriced fad? NO!!! You will see. They will be mainstream mobile devices... and they will even replace many desktops!
The problem with netbooks is that they were tiny little laptops with the same issues as grown up laptops - long boot times, short battery life, heavy weight, et al.
My son's highschool is deploying 1000 iPads this month to all students for use as a tool at school and at home. I have a feeling that by the end of the year, few of the students and faculty will be doing anything on a laptop or desktop.
Comments
Some of the index is a leading indicator and some of it is a trailing indicator, and as a result it is a very ambiguous index. The consumer's true sentiment is based upon actual prior circumstances, current conditions, and it is also based upon perceived upcoming circumstances. So, YES, the media itself creates and perpetuates the problem... which makes the media itself a big part of the problem.
Consumer sentiment is not the same as consumer spending, of course, and it is a very misleading index, IMO.
To be fair, I've heard more POSITIVE talking heads lately than in a long time. The media is very polarized. Some reports suggest doom & gloom, while others talk about fantastic earnings and terrific opportunities. Reality is probably somewhere in the middle. That's partially why the market goes waaay down and then waaay up. The computer trading is another reason.
TM
To be fair, I've heard more POSITIVE talking heads lately than in a long time.
True. A lot of it is probably due to the fact that we had two good days in succession in the market.
I can't imagine being a tiny democratic country like Israel, surrounded by some of the worst examples of terrorists states, greedy oil-rich Arab OPEC empires, Arab dictators bent on the destruction of Israel and the United States, and others.
Israel is not without fault, and neither are we, to be honest... But there is NO compariing Israel or the United States to terrorists.
TM
We need to cut the cord. It can live on all it wants, but we can't afford it.
And Pakistan is even worse, just a pile of hell doing the world no good, yet we give it truckloads while our conditions decay every day. The comparison isn't without merit - both are wastes of scarce public funds.
It's largely political, and it's also the fact that the media is a business. It's about ratings, and it's also about shaping public opinion.
It's obvious that more and more, we are seeing the media turn against Obama. The media gave Obama a lot of support for quite a while, especially CNN, and liberal newspapers like the New York Times. But Obama is such a failure, that the sentiment of the whole world is much less positive to him, and in fact, it's quite negative compared to how it was.
The stock market isn't the primary focus of the consumer... although there is definitely a link.
The market is reactive and so is the consumer. It's a cycle. The media feeds the cycle, but eventually the cycle changes.
I don't agree that the index is worthless. I do believe, however, that it is flawed. It is misleading.
Charlie, my college degree is in advertising and public relations. I took all kinds of courses in public opinion, public (mass) persuasion, rhetoric, semantics, effective advertising and marketing, television advertising, print advertising, media and opinion manipulation, interpersonal and mass communications, behavior systems engineering, and tons more. I really enjoyed it.
I can tell you without any doubt that the index is a very misleading index, and is also used in a very misleading way. However, it is not worthless. Just like the Iowa straw poll. Is it worthless? Should it really represent as much as it seems to?... but due to the massive media attention and credibility bestowed upon it, it is waaay more infuential than it probably deserves to be.
The media is so powerful Charlie. Sooooo powerful. If you can control the media, you can practically control everything.
Oprah is an example. One of the best examples of self-promoting use of media in our history. There are many. Some political, some social, some commercial.... you get the picture.
TM
I hate those terrorists and oil mongers and that's as far as I'll take it.
TM
TM
I think I would take ANY one of those Republican candidates over Obama.
TM
He is by far the most intelligent of all the Republican candidates. However, he will not make much headway due to his baggage.
TM
Hey... I hope tomorrow is a good day in the market. I bought some positions on Friday, and I would like to get somewhere with this crazy market.
I have a new strategy that I am going to implement soon. It's more long-term.
TM
Right on!
>I don't think it was worth losing 20 of our Navy Seals to get OBL.
Biden couldn't wait to expose the info so the perpetrators of the alleged capture could become targets. If he hadn't Obama would have.
>Now the Chinese have first hand knowledge of our Stealth helicopters,
Which is worse?: Clinton giving them multi-warhead missile technology information or Obama giving them stealth technology they probably didn't know existed for the helicopters.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But I watched Meet the Press, which I rarely do, and what's-his-name was so rude to Bachmann. He would ask a question and as she started to answer he would override her talking with a contradiction or another question. It was like watching a TV interpretation on a crime show of an interview of a known criminal by a wildman policeman.
He was especially rude about her religion and a quote from Christians that the woman should be submissive to her husband. Gregory tried to interpret submissive as something that shouldn't be done--but I don't recall his ever questioning OBama and Friends about the various religions in the world that have women wearing burkas (spelling?) with only their eyes visible. Is that independence for women? How is it the religions of 57 states of Obama aren't open to question -- is it because Bachmann (and Palin) are women and possible winners for the title of "First Woman President" and they can't stand that a Republican could win that title instead of Hillary?
Then we have the President now making speeches like he had nothing to do with the ramrodded bills through democrat houses for two years and acting like he's the middle of the road conciliator? He kept the party of "No" on cutting spending going for weeks with his games while the Republicans came up with three bills to actually CUT spending--what this country must do.
I see all this as very dangerous to the future of our country because I see the political patterns in the MSM and Obamaland as more push and shove rather than fix the problems and put the country first. It's going to be more hiddle donations and backing from the Wall Street friends of the Dems and the Hollywood movies and the Hollywood stars speaking out in favor of Obama.
I also see more racial divide as a tool to try to keep the African vote blindly for Obama.
The division of the country while pretending to be the conciliator is going to wreak havoc in the markets.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The dilemma and challenge for us conservatives is that the economy will improve a little, which is a good thing of course, but Obama will be in a position to use it in his campaign.
If Obama wins, then the REAL serious damage will come... all the way through 2016!! He would have enough time to cause massive damage to the United States unlike anything we have ever seen.
TM
How about that Google buy?
I have posted in the past that I believe Apple is going to dip into their treasure chest and make a brilliant purchase. I still believe this, and when it finally happens, we will all be applauding.
TM
Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.
But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1- &smid=tw-nytimesbusiness&seid=auto
What was your entry point on AAPL this time? I know you went long
Just saying it is a poor use of our money, especially with so many needs at home now and in the future.
I'd take Cain if he could resurrect Godfather's Pizza to its former glory :shades:
First, The entitlement class who are of working age and are receiving payments need to have cuts. There need to be changes about what and how they can spend the public money.
Next, the social security crowd who are already receiving payments which are more than they put in are doing well. I watched an older fellow putting gas into his foreign built fairly new car at the local quick market where I stop for coffee. I would gauge him as having benefitted from the growth in the economies through the 50s and 60s and 70s. He probably had a well-paying job at NCR or GM (or one of the other auto-related suppliers here). I didn't sense that he was a government worker such as from the Wright Patterson Air Force Base, a large area employer. He probably bought and sold houses several times and profitted greatly from each as housing values rose. His social security benefits, along with Medicare, are rapidly rising taken together as he gets older. He probably feels his wealth in the bank and bonds along with his home(s) shouldn't be open to being used for his own healthcare or other care as he ages further. It should all be supplied by the government is probably his attitude.
That attitude and payout has to change.
But my approach is that the system should not further the "take from the rich and give to the poor" approach: all should have to feel cuts. Only the lowest incomes on social security and with health problems should be exempted.
I don't see a Congress or president that's going to slow the exonential increase in entitlements coming as the baby boomers retire, and it has started now
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know in some European areas, the top few actually supported higher taxes for themselves, and their wish was granted. I have never understood why it is such an issue here. Some have sacrificed a lot more than others in the past few years, and that is only going to continue. You get what you pay for,I suppose.
Do you believe sacrifice is truly being shared today?
Oh, OK. Seems we agree.
Thanks for explaining.
TM
That would have indicated a sagacity about money and spending to actually help our economy rather than a foreign company's profit line.
>...shared today?
No. So many of the wealthy are escaping taxes by various methods. Start with the Kennedy's as examples. Bring all their money and various shelters home to the tax table.
But I do feel there are a lot of people over 65 who have benefited greatly from the past economy and have used it up and are very vocal about anything they feel is entitlement for them being cut.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
This led MSNBC's Pat Buchanan on Monday's "Morning Joe" to challenge the Oracle of Omaha asking, "Why doesn’t he set an example and send a check for $5 billion to the federal government?"
PAT BUCHANAN: No, I’m writing a note to Warren Buffett. But look, I’m a little fed up with these people who come on, you know, their big op-eds, all these admonitions. Why doesn’t he set an example and send a check for $5 billion to the federal government? He’s got about $40 billion. You know, you had a plan up there, I talked to Howie Carr at Boston where the super-rich could contribute an extra amount. It was something like one-tenth of one percent did it. You get all this noise from these big rich folks. Let them send checks and set an example instead of writing op-eds.
Of course, the liberals in the media never seem to think about this hypocrisy.
The folks at the Huffington Post were so excited about Buffett's call they featured it as a headline at their front page:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/08/15/pat-buchanan-challenges-wa- rren-buffett-set-example-and-send-check-5-b#ixzz1V6SASwqF
This is what I have said all along when the fatcat elitists in Hollywood and NY make their hollow rants about the rich getting off easy.
Random italicized posts don't help anybody.
I had been day-trading AAPL, and when I bought it around $350 in extended hours trading, I flipped those shares for a gain. In hindsight I wish I had kept those shares.
I continued to day trade AAPL, but I have not flipped the latest shares, which are at $380. I will not flip them any longer, and I will buy more at ANY and EVERY dip of 2%. That is my plan moving forward.
So, I might as well fill you in on my latest investment approach... it's not complicated by any means. I am holding specific diversified stocks for a long term, and I will only day-trade SEPERATELY from them. AAPL is not my signifcant holding.
My significant holdings are three dividend-paying stocks... INTC, VOD, and LLY... (approx. 4% - 6%). In addition to them I own significant positions in two financials, BAC and C, which are showing nice gains, and I expect them to continue to do so (finally). Also, I have energy in the form of CHK and XOM. To continue my diversification, I own CAT and GM. I have a speculative play on S, because it got so horribly hammered recently, and I am speculating that they receive the next generation iPhone.
I will buy more of these holdings when they dip. In addition, I will increase the number of shares of each of them every month (approximately). If there is a huge gain in one of them, I will ring the register a little. If there is some news that warrants me to sell (or buy) a position, I will do so.
Now, in addition to those specific stocks, I own three ETFs... SPY, DIA, and QQQ... these ETFs closely mirror the indexes in the same way that GLD mirrors the price of gold (which I do NOT own). By holding these ETFs, I do not have to select individual stocks beyond the ones I have selected, and I can trade in and out of them instantly. I believe that the DOW, the S&P, and the NASDAQ indexes will be higher by year's end, so I am significantly invested in those indexes, and I can increase my holdings every time they dip, just like a regular stock.
I also day-trade those ETFs, as they move up and down during the day.
I do hope to increase my position on AAPL, but I will have to do so carefuly, because I don't own much of it, and I don't own it at a great price (or do I?). What do you think the share price of AAPL will climb to? And how soon? Do you think I should be more agressive and buy more AAPL shares now rather than wait? Help me out... you are the AAPL guru around here.
TM
MADISON, Wis.—
Wisconsin farmers are happy the U.S. Department of Transportation is backing away from its plan to reclassify agricultural machinery as commercial vehicles.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-farmers-driverli,0,7617341.story
http://www.fb.org/index.php?action=newsroom.newsclip&id=69605
http://coloradofarmbureau.com/2011/06/dot-may-require-commercial-licenses-for-fa- rm-equipment/
Actually they bought Motorola Mobility which was 1/2 of the company. Motorola Solutions was not part of the deal. Since they split back in January through June, Mobility shares had dropped over 20% while Solutions was up over 20%. Making/marketing hardware isn't that great of a business IMHO.
Google I'm sure was looking at a way to become more competitive directly with Apple. Although they say Motorola will have to compete with the other handset makers for Android access, I kind of doubt that will be the case for very long.
What should Apple do? I think wait until RIM is looking for buyer.
Disagree.
Perhaps Apple should buy Google. :surprise:
TM
Why?
The growth in Smartphones is on the consumer side and RIM thus far hasn't made much progress in. On the commercial side, they are feeling pressure from many other handset makers.
IMHO, combing Apples ease of use and flexibility with RIM's strong commercial base and security would be great.
Perhaps Apple should buy Google.
Even I know that Jobs couldn't pull that off.
I'd like to see how much money the crooked banking side of the Bush family was able to hide away, too.
I'd group public sector workers, including teachers and police, in with that group who doesn't want to cut entitlements, especially when retired. If one is going to be crucified, then all need to be.
That would be a huge red flag. With Android holding strong to 40% of the US Smartphone market and Apple with 26%. That would be a monopoly of Biblical proportions.
Speaking of Buchanan, although he's a bit too social conservative for me, even he'd likely be a better bet than Newt. I do like his idea for Buffet to put his money where his mouth is.
Exactly.
TM
Yes indeed.
TM
I'm not the so called AAPL guru, but I do have a strong opinion on AAPL. This stock will make news highs probably within the next couple weeks (unless the market collapses once again, but I don't think it will). By the end of the year, I see AAPL at least at the $450 level. if not over $500 after the next great earnings report, the new iPhone5, and the iPad3.
Yes, you ARE the AAPL guru... and that's a compliment.
TM
TM
Say, what is the problem with BIDU today? It's crashing.
I don't think it's crashing... just having a bad day. I actually think it's a great buy, long-term.
TM
That would probably be the beginning of the end for both of them. I think Apple needs to move into other areas rather than dilute their own area. MSFT is too large for them to buy and bury. Maybe Oracle to get into the Database end of the business. I still do not see Apple competing in the Business or Engineering World. They got a good grip on academia by handing out hardware and selling cheap to students. They seem to me a graphic arts tool more than a serious business or engineering platform. Though they now run most any operating system and software. Probably the biggest roadblock for me is proprietary hardware. I like mixing and matching. Then little things like having to send your iPod in when the battery goes bad. I will probably never be a real Apple fan though they have some cool stuff.
Anyone besides me consider the current tablets anything more than an overpriced fad? Netbooks are all but history. Before I even got around to buying one. I could get into a 2lb laptop with a real keyboard. My current Dell laptop is 6 years old. Ready for a new one soon. Though it still has the original battery.
The tablet is FAR from a fad. And, the "netbook"? Let's just say that Steve Jobs wouldn't give the category any merit, but then came out with the MacBook Air in a 10.6" dimension, and it is a smashing sales success, as is the 13.3" version. Once they give 4G capabilities to the MacBook Air products, you can see the evolution. Next step could be a touch screen on the MacBook Air, which could fold over as a hybrid tablet/netbook. The other approach is perhaps a better Bluetooth keyboard paired to the iPad. All the iPad needs now (which might be on the next generation) (and in addition to the matching Bluetooth Keyboard I mentioned) is USB or Thunderbolt output (with HDMI conversion), and a better ability to print and manage Microsoft office documents.
Overpriced fad? NO!!! You will see. They will be mainstream mobile devices... and they will even replace many desktops!
TM
Here's an article from wsj.com discussing the challenge for MSFT in the new world of tablets:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903885604576486343139938136.html?m- od=WSJ_Tech_LEFTTopNews
The problem with netbooks is that they were tiny little laptops with the same issues as grown up laptops - long boot times, short battery life, heavy weight, et al.
My son's highschool is deploying 1000 iPads this month to all students for use as a tool at school and at home. I have a feeling that by the end of the year, few of the students and faculty will be doing anything on a laptop or desktop.
PS
Who is paying for 1000 iPads? Or are they a gift for Jobs?